Manage your subscription

A martyr in the making

IT WILL not come as a surprise to many people that someone who endangers the
lives of other people in a campaign of arson can threaten his own. But the
prison hunger strike by convicted Animal Liberation Front (ALF) terrorist Barry
Horne seems to have caught the British government off balance.

As New Scientist went to press, Horne lay dying in hospital. The
government says that it not will yield to his demands for a Royal Commission to
review policy on animal experiments. At the same time, a group calling itself
the Animal Rights Militia has promised that if Horne dies it will kill 10
people, including physiologist Colin Blakemore of Oxford University and Mark
Matfield, executive director of the Research Defence Society—two prominent
defenders of animal research.

The parallels with the situation in Northern Ireland in 1981 are all too
frightening. Then, the Republican terrorist Bobby Sands starved himself to death
and a cycle of violence followed, only now being brought to an end by a fragile
peace process.

Horne is being hailed as ALF’s first martyr. And like it or not, many people
who care about animal welfare see Horne as a “good” man who is ready to put his
life on the line for a principle.

Advertisement

But what does ALF really stand for? Those at its core seem motivated as much
by a hatred of modern society than any love for animals. One of ALF’s founders,
Ronnie Lee, also in jail, wants to return to a preindustrial society with a
global population of less than 100 million. Pets, in the view of many of ALF’s
leaders, are “slaves”.

These are not the views of most animal lovers. But their support may go to
Horne and the extremists of ALF as long as there is no mainstream movement to
unite them. We need a “peace process” where the many people concerned about
animal welfare can express their views democratically and the extremists can be
seen for what they are.

Sadly, the Labour government is making this hard to achieve. In a 1996 policy
document, Labour “supported” the idea of a Royal Commission. But since coming to
office it has made no moves in this direction. Before Horne called off an
earlier hunger strike in October 1997, government officials met his supporters
and responded in writing to their questions. While the government denies it made
any promises, Horne’s backers went away with the impression that the government
would yield to threats—setting the stage for the current hunger
strike.

The way out of this mess is to set up an open forum to look at the issues of
animal welfare and experimentation. This probably can’t now take place
immediately, nor take the form of a Royal Commission—the government can’t
be seen to react to Horne’s demands. But it should include all those who wish to
pursue a peaceful debate.

The public appears to back the use of animals where medical benefits can be
expected. But it is possible that an open debate would result in further
restrictions on the use of animals. If that’s the view of the majority, then so
be it.